jesus' comment. in other words, it was exactly the sort of uncivil comment paxton was talking about. what is to be done? paxton recommended going away from anonymous posts to a system that requires commoners to use their real names and sign in via facebook. from virginia dog, anonymity serves two very important functions. it permits people to speak more freely. this is a sign of sunlight. it allows people to express ideas where they might be constrained because of their immediate social setting. and from yellowjacket, quote, it's not the anonymity that creates the bile. it's the inadequate and ineffective moderation where standards are fairly and uniformly enforced people behave themselves. hey, these comments were reasonable. a good conversation about free speech.

too bad they were followed by sotg saying good riddance to you, milksop. the post is worst than pravda. in a world increasingly built on lies, the "washington post" is in the vaughn guard. i do not thank you for your service. you are, well, i will not go there. disrespectful, but still tame when compared to other savagery online. in 2010, a 17-year-old girl from long island committed suicide only to have trolls descend on her tribute page and post nooses. in 2006, an 18-year-old girl from california died in an auto accident only to have photographs of her disfigured body disseminated online, and someone actually actually e-mailed them to her parents with a subject line that read "hey daddy, i'm still alive." anonymity breeds bad behavior. patrick is right. if you want to stand on a soapbox in the town square, we

still get to see your face. that's hashed bawl for now. thanks for being with us. "the ed show" with ed schultz starts right now. good evening, americans, and welcome to "the ed show" from new york. republicans woke up this morning saying a new fore-letter word or an old four-letter word? bush. this is "the ed show." let's get to work. >> you will not definitively rule out a run for president the year 2016? >> you know the republican party is in bad shape when this happens. >> i won't, but i'm not going to declare it today either, matt. >> jim moore and jonathan alter will tell us if america could get fooled for the third time. in his first post election interview, mitt romney shares his regrets. >> it was very harmful. what i said is not what i believe. >> katrina vanden heuvel of "the nation" on why the romneys can't lose gracefully. corporate profits soar through the roof as the american worker struggles. tonight i'll break down the numbers and make the case for

higher wages. speaker john boehner flat-out lies about the sequester. >> there is no plan for democrats or the white house to replace the sequester. >> the congressional panel will weigh in on the speaker's latest whopper. and dennis rodman visits the rogue state of north korea and brings home a message for the president. >> he want obama to do one thing, call him. >> plus, rodman has a new best friend. >> he is a great guy. he is a great guy. if you sit down and talk to him. >> we'll bring you all the details from rodman's wild trip. >> good to have you with us tonight, folks. thanks for watching. the republican party is struggling with branding issues and identity crisis that a demographic shift going against the party platform. and in the midst of all of this, here comes another bush. >> i have a voice i want to share my beliefs about how the conservative movement and the republican party can regain its footing. because we have lost our way. >> jeb bush declared his voice

to be an important one in the future of the republican party. just when you washed away the taste of eight years under george w. bush, the former governor from florida raised eyebrows when he had this exchange with matt lauer. >> you will not definitively rule out a run for president in the year 2016? >> i won't, but i'm not going to declare today either, matt. >> well, he is not ready to declare, but jeb bush is definitely putting himself out there in the republican party. it's a smart move because jeb bush is the guy in the republican party who wants to have it really both ways. he says his father and ronald reagan would be out of place in today's conservative republican party. but then he shows up as one of the featured speakers at cpac this year? jeb bush has remained popular in florida, home to many, and i mean many medicare and social security recipients. this is despite bush's lobbying ties to one of the country's biggest medicare scam artists. then you have jeb bush's position on immigration, which is now puzzling.

he made his reputation on being one of the more moderate voices on immigration policy in the republican party, until today. >> if we want to create an immigration policy that is going to work, we can't continue to make illegal immigration an easier path than legal immigration. >> so bush is coming down hard against a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. in a new book about immigration policy, bush and his co-author write "those who violated the law can remain but cannot obtain a cherished fruits of citizenship." in the book, bush continues, he says "a grant of citizenship is an undeserving reward for conduct that we cannot afford to encourage. however, illegal immigrants who wish to become citizens should have the choice of returning to their native countries and applying through normal immigration processes that now would be much more open than before." this is a far cry from jeb

bush's position on a path to citizenship as recently as a year ago. >> you have to deal with this issue. you can't ignore it. and so either a path to citizenship, which i would support, and that does put me probably out of the mainstream of most conservatives, or a path to legalization, a path to residency of some time. >> less than six months ago, reporters wrote headlines like this -- "jeb bush supports path to citizenship." today it's "jeb bush: path to citizenship not needed." this flip-flop may look strange to the american mainstream, but for jeb bush, i guess you would say it is necessary. it puts him further to the right on immigration from marco rubio, and it puts him at odds with texas governor rick perry who is i hope also considering another presidential run. jeb bush threw his hat in the ring today, not just for the presidential election four years from now, but as the new voice

of the republican party, someone that is going to get attention and who already has hispanic credibility. here is the trick. jeb bush can come out and talk out of both sides of his mouth, which is certainly important in today's climate. one other thing to really consider, democrats. what democrat is going to have the power, the capability to defeat jeb bush in florida if he did ever get the republican nomination? there is going to be over 600,000 registered hispanics by 2016 in the state of florida. it's true that romney could have won florida and still lost the election. but things change all the time. florida is a state the republicans would love to have. and the only probably democrat that could beat jeb bush in florida arguably would be hillary clinton. that going to happen? get your cell phones out. we want to though what you think. tonight's question, will this country ever elect another bush? text "a" for yes. text b for no to 67622. you can always go to our blog at ed.msnbc.com. we'll bring you the results

later on in the show. i am joined tonight by mitch caesar, chairman of the democratic party in broward county, florida, and a member of the executive board of the democratic national committee. also with us tonight, jonathan alter, msnbc political analyst and bloomberg columnist. and jim moore, director of the progress texas pac and author of "bush's brain." jim, you first tonight. you know the bush family well. is jeb definitely positioning himself to make a run in 2016 and become a strong voice in the republican party to resurface as maybe a leader that they're desperately looking for? >> if so, ed, he has made a big mistake. i think this whole thing with immigration has been misguided. he is trying to parse the issue and make the people on the far right happy, but also suggest to latinos and hispanics that this is not something that is negative from me. the problem is he is suggesting if you give legal status to undocumenteds, all they're interested in is a paycheck.

all they want from america is some money. they don't really care about our future, our history, our dreams, our principles. they came to america, and he is suggesting in fact once they get all the money they want, they're going to go home. and that is sort of diminishing the whole thing for hispanics. i think what he has done inadvertently is position america as sort of an atm to undocumented workers and telling them to go ahead and go home when you're done with us. >> jonathan, how can bush reconcile his new position on immigration without being viewed as somebody caving to the tea party? >> well, i think it was a flip-flop that he executed in order to put himself in a position to get the republican nomination the next time around, make himself a viable candidate, which he already was. but it was a recognition that the base of the republican party is still very nativist, anti-immigrant, and he would not have been able to get nominated with his previous position. but i think as jim said, he has

been too clever by half in doing this, because latinos look very closely at this issue. and they will feel betrayed by jeb bush. and so all of the support that he has built up all these years by being fairly enlightened on this issue, he is just now thrown away. that was not a smart move. >> you bring up a great point, because jeb bush i think disappointed democrats who thought they had a republican ally on immigration. here is a statement from annette goldstein of the florida democratic party. she says, "today it is deeply troubling that governor jeb bush has reversed his position on a pathway to citizenship and sided with tea party extremists in order to advance his political ambitions. as a hispanic american from florida, it is sad to lose one of the few pro immigration republicans left." unfortunately, this reversal prove that there will never be enough border security or big enough fence to satisfy the republican base.

mitch, you're in florida. you know the state well. is this a tough day for democrats as well who know that they have to have republican allies to get immigration reform done? >> well, i don't think we're really afraid of jeb bush in florida. you know, he was never really vetted by the tea party pretty much. he was out of office. he has been out of office for a number of years. and what he is trying to do is ride the dynamic of, in effect, a new republican party, a new republican primary voter and effect a new jeb bush to great the new normal. as we know, there is nothing new about what they're doing. it's certainly not normal to most floridians or most americans. and i think he has made a great miscalibration, if you will, because people see through it. what is most interesting is the fact that marco rubio, he has gone as you said, editor, the right of marco rubio, which in most cases is kind of difficult. and in effect, has staked himself out as a competitor to

marco rubio. i'm convinced as i'm sure most people are, they won't run against each other. this is just an interesting first chapter. >> well, jeb bush jr., the conversation in florida is he may run against newly elected congressman joe garcia, which would be a precursor to the dad saying, you know, i'd really like to get that republican nomination. how influential is this? is jeb bush jr. going to run? >> well, i think it's been talked about since before the last election, before joe garcia won. we think that's not an easy district. joe garcia did great. he is still doing very, very well. that's a serious challenge. but what we have to look at is they're using him in effect as a stalk horse for the bush dynasty. and i think that's clearly what they're attempting to do. >> here is bush talking to matt lauer about a new tax revenue in a budget deal. listen to this. >> i think it's a little hard to imagine after january where the highest -- the biggest tax

crease in american history took place, then go back to say we have a revenue problem negative, wiggle room there at all? there. >> may be if the president is sincere about dealing with our structural problems. >> jonathan, isn't this a no-no for the republican party to concede that there might be some room on new taxes? >> no, that's actually a smart position for him to take, because all he is saying is let's go back to what mitt romney was saying during the debates, which was close tax loop holes. one of the things that is crazy about the john boehner position right now is it's a repudiation of what romney ran on last year. they're defining closing loopholes as somehow raising taxes when it's not. you know, just to go back to the basic flip-flop, it's generally not good politics to do this, ed, because what it does is it undermines people's faith in your political consistency in your basic political profile of being a principled person. if you're just flopping around, it reminds me of what his father did many years ago, george h.w. bush when he was in the congress

in '60s, his nickname was rubbers, as in condoms because he was so much in favor of birth control, planned parenthood. he was on the board of planned parenthood in connecticut. and then he does a 180 when he goes on a ticket with ronald reagan. and suddenly is against abortion after being pro-choice. >> yeah. >> that did not help him with women. this will not help his son with latinos. just because they liked him in the past doesn't mean they're going to hike him in the future. >> sure. >> and if they don't like him, ley he doesn't have a calling card and he is not a particularly strong candidate. >> and what about his timing? what about his timing in all of this? last year bush told charlie rose that he missed his chance to run for president. here it is. >> have you made a decision that you do not want to be president? >> i've not made that decision, although i think there is a window of opportunity in life for all sorts of reasons, and this was probably my time. >> jim, you think he regrets not running in 2012? >> he didn't really have a

chance, because the country was real tired of the bushes after his brother. the problem for the bush family dynasty, ed, that w. is the guy who won the state governorship here in texas. and anybody who wins in texas is immediately considered a national candidate. jeb was always thought of as the smart bush, which is a bit of a condemnation in any community. but in this particular case, they thought he would be the first one to run for president. i think that he is probably going to run again. he sees himself as the guy who is going to lead the republicans out of the wilderness in 2016. i doubt it, but he is going to run. >> and is his other son already declare, george p. bush in texas? >> he has already said he is going to run. he is very much acting like a bush, trying to decide what office to run for. he hasn't talked about policy or principle. he is basically looking for what job he is going to apply for. he is going to run. >> the kennedys, they're acting like they're the kennedys, they've got this dynasty and everything.

it's not the same. well could have a titanic struggle between hillary clinton and jeb bush in 2016. the press is going to be going yeah, let's get that, and, you know, let's move to that story which would be wonderful for all of us. but the premise of that is that the american people like this family so much they want to put them back in the white house. and we're kind of -- i'd argue we're kind of 0 for 2 with bushes. and i'm not sure americans are going to want to try this again. >> mitch caesar, jonathan alter, jim moore, thank you so much for being on "the ed show" tonight. share your thoughts with us on twitter @edshow and facebook. we always want to know what you think. coming up, mitt romney is still trying to explain away his 47% comments, and blames his loss on obama care. katrina vanden heuvel of "the nation" will weigh in on romney's first post election interview. get over it.

direct rates side by side to find you a great deal, even if it's not with us. [ ding ] oh, that's helpful! well, our company does that, too. actually, we invented that. it's like a sauna in here. helping you save, even if it's not with us -- now, that's progressive! call or click today. no mas pantalones!

john boehner takes lying to a new level.

the congressional panel weighs in on the speaker's latest attempt to pass the blame on the sequester. and dennis rodman is back from north korea with a message for the white house? see how washington is responding to the basketball star's trip, coming up. don't forget, you can listen to my radio show on sirius xm radio channel 127 monday through friday, noon to 3:00 p.m. share your thoughts on facebook and on twitter using #edshow. we're coming right back.

welcome back to "the ed show." well, he has had time to reflect, yet mitt romney is still divorced from reality. in an interview with chris wallace of fox news, romney pointed to his failure to connect with minority voters as the real reason for his loss. yet romney is still convinced

that his messaging was the problem? really? not his policies? okay. here is the former republican nominee attempting to explain his 47% remarks. >> yeah, it was a very unfortunate statement that i made. it's not what i meant. i didn't express myself as i wished i would have. you know, when you speak in private, you don't spend as much time thinking about how something could be twisted and distorted and can come out wrong and be used. but i did, and it was very harmful. what i said is not what i believe. obviously, my whole campaign, my whole life has been devoted to helping people, all the people. i care about all the people of the country. but that hurt there is no question that hurt, and did real damage to my campaign. >> when the story came out, why didn't he say just that? we all know that those 47% remarks weren't just a one-time gaffe. romney made similar comments in a conference call to donors after the election, blaming his loss on president obama's

handing out gifts to minority groups? romney is still convinced that is the case. >> the president had the power of incumbency. obama care was very attractive, and they came out in large numbers to vote. that was part of his successful campaign. >> the man who created romney care believes the affordable care act was romney's way of using patronage to secure votes? but again, romney asserts. his loss was a messaging issue, certainly not a policy problem. >> the weakness that our campaign had and that i had is we weren't effective at taking my message, primarily to the minority voters, to hispanic americans, african-americans, other minorities. that was a real weakness. we did real well with a majority population, but not with minority populations. and that was a failing. that was a real mistake. >> why do you think that was? >> well, i think the obama care attractiveness and feature was something we underestimated,

particularly among lower incomes. >> joining us tonight katrina vanden heuvel, part owner and publisher of "the nation" magazine. thank you for your time. >> thank you, thank you. >> what is the purpose? you can go to anybody that didn't win an election, john kerry, al gore, bob dole. this was a strange interview. what is the purpose? >> not clear to me. the romney revival tour? i think he wanted to repeat that what he said is not what he believed, ed? i'm not sure. this is mr. 47%. he is trying to say, as you said, that it was the messaging. no, it was very clearly, this election was, a mandate on policies that a majority of americans didn't want. this man is speaking about how he couldn't connect with minorities as the great demographic shifts in this country occur. yeah, if you talk about self deportation as the answer to our immigration policy, i don't think you're going to connect well with latinos in this

country. >> doesn't the party -- maybe not so much in the next candidate, because the party is going to have to address the mistakes that were made by romney. doesn't the party have to come forward with some admission that it was wrong where they were on policy? >> but here is what i don't understand, because i think this romney interview is irrelevant. what stuns me, ed, is that this republican party doesn't seem to understand a basic fundamental american concept. elections matter. you have a republican party which continues a scorched earth obstructionism after its policies have been repudiated. it sits in washington and tries to tell the american people that government is broken. no it's not. it's bought. the republicans are butt even more than the democrats. but their policies have failed. and the republicans put up an example of the most brazen excesses of vulture capitalism and still adhere to that is a discrediting of a republican party that we need in this -- we

need a real republican party. but at the moment it is white, male, pale, stale. and even jeb bush is backtracking on his policies because they still have the same billionaires running this party, ed, and they've got the same base. you can rearrange the deck chairs on the titanic but until they take a really soul-searching hard look, this party is in deep trouble. >> they're convinced, the family is, the romneys never got a chance to show the real mitt. >> give me a break. i mean, it is the most sort of tired trope in american political history to do the blame the media. give me a break. the campaign kept him in lockdown. so he didn't really grapple with his mormonism and his faith, nor did he really move to try and explain his business success. they can't have it both ways. ann romney, with all respect for

the wife of a defeated politician is saying they got sort of run over by the media. the only media that ran them over, ed, was fox, because they lived in a bubble of delusional thinking that they were going to win and this and that. karl rove election night, remind your viewers, he literally walked into the control room to say no, we didn't lose. yeah, you did. >> what do you make them believing that obama care sealed his fate? >> i find it ugly, because it is a kind of rerun of his 47, you know, moochers, takers, and makers. if the power of incumbency is to provide universal health care, which we need to build on, to millions, 30 million americans, if that's patron and corruption and giveaway, then this man should -- particularly romney care, the man who created romney care should understand that this is part of american political life, and it's a reform that this country has fought for. and part of what millions need. but he hasn't given up on the 47%.

>> no. no. >> he says he wasn't understood that like i said what i didn't believe? it is so romney, because that's part of why, you know, if there is a tragedy to romney, he reinvented himself and reinvented himself. and he made the flip-flop seem like a tired tactical move because he flip-flopped so many times. there must be a new term for that. >> is the ego big enough for him to even think that maybe '16? i know it's crazy political talk. >> it's not about romney. you know that, ed. you know politics better than anyone. it's about this party. they don't. >> they have issues. they have to disavow from what he is saying right there. >> yeah. >> they have to admit -- >> and he knows that. he knows that. that's why there is a sadness. defeated politicians are sad. >> katrina vanden heuvel, good to have you with us. thank you so much. the dow jones closed within 50 points of an all-time high. but workers' wages are in the dumps. i've got some numbers for you next to explain all of that. and john boehner thought

that he could get away with lying about the sequester on national television. he thought wrong. we're calling him out. and our congressional panel will do the same. stay with us. [ female announcer ] going to sleep may be easy, but when you wake up in the middle of the night it can be frustrating. it's hard to turn off and go back to sleep. intermezzo is the first and only prescription sleep aid approved for use as needed in the middle of the night when you can't get back to sleep. it's an effective sleep medicine you don't take before bedtime. take it in bed only when you need it and have at least four hours left for sleep.

do not take intermezzo if you have had an allergic reaction to drugs containing zolpidem, such as ambien. allergic reactions such as shortness of breath or swelling of your tongue or throat may occur and may be fatal. intermezzo should not be taken if you have taken another sleep medicine at bedtime or in the middle of the night or drank alcohol that day. do not drive or operate machinery until at least 4 hours after taking intermezzo and you're fully awake. driving, eating, or engaging in other activities while not fully awake without remembering the event the next day have been reported. abnormal behaviors may include aggressiveness, agitation, hallucinations, or confusion. alcohol or taking other medicines that make you sleepy may increase these risks. in depressed patients, worsening of depression, including risk of suicide, may occur. intermezzo, like most sleep medicines, has some risk of dependency. common side effects are headache, nausea, and fatigue. so if you suffer from middle-of-the-night insomnia,

ask your doctor about intermezzo and return to sleep again. ♪

welcome back to "the ed show." well, the numbers are in, and i guess you could say it's a golden age for corporations. corporate profits hit record highs, record highs in the second half of 2012. today the dow closed at its

highest level this year. in the meantime, millions of americans are stranded and still out of work. "the ed show's" vulture chart, i love it. it of course illustrates the exploding income inequality in america over the last 30 years. this chart doesn't look too different. it shows how america's corporations have racked up historic profits while labor income remains very sluggish. so as you can see, corporate profits were on the rise as far back as 2003. they took a hit with the rest of the economy during recession. but since the recovery, corporate profits, where have they gone? well, they have boomed, big-time. now the share of national income going to corporations is at its highest level since 1950. and the amount going to individuals is near its lowest since 1966. there are several ways to explain this lopsided recovery. well, technology, yeah.

technology is up. corporations do more with fewer workers. multinational corporations have done what? well, they have outsourced for cheaper labor. they don't want to pay anybody. and the recession caused the corporations to slash payrolls and keep wages stagnant. at the same time, worker productivity went through the roof. americans are afraid to slack off because it's hard to find another job. so employees are doing more work for less money. this has kept employment down while lifting corporate profits through the roof. the bottom line in all of this, instead of investing these profits back into the economy and hiring more americans and paying their workers to do more, corporations are just sitting on the cash, enjoying the profits at the top, concentrating the wealth. corporations are choosing profits over the american worker. even today there is no plan from democrats or the white house to replace the sequester. >> the speaker gets busted

speaking lies. >> that is just not true. >> the congressional panel tackles boehner's problem with the truth. that's next. offering you the good news for batman. plus, you don't want to miss this buzzer beater. the world is outraged at north korea following their third nuclear weapons test. but dennis rodman could care less. >> you said you love kim and think he is awesome. were you aware of his threats to destroy the united states? >> eugene robinson weighs in on rodman's visit to the rogue state of north korea. you should know that axiron is here. the only underarm treatment for low t. that's right, the one you apply to the underarm. axiron is not for use in women or anyone younger than 18. axiron can transfer to others through direct contact. women, especially those who are or who may become pregnant, and children should avoid contact where axiron is applied as unexpected signs of puberty in children or changes in body hair or increased acne in women may occur.

report these signs and symptoms to your doctor if they occur. tell your doctor about all medical conditions and medications. do not use if you have prostate or breast cancer. serious side effects could include increased risk of prostate cancer; worsening prostate symptoms; decreased sperm count; ankle, feet, or body swelling; enlarged or painful breasts; problems breathing while sleeping; and blood clots in the legs. common side effects include skin redness or irritation where applied, increased red blood cell count, headache, diarrhea, vomiting, and increase in psa. see your doctor, and for a 30-day free trial, go to axiron.com.

thanks for stay with us tonight. house speaker john boehner is reaching a new low, and sometimes a lie is a lie no matter how you cut it. here is speaker boehner describing his meeting with president obama to try to avert the sequester. >> but i'd asked the president and senator reid to come with a plan to replace the sequester.

and yet even today there is no plan from senate democrats or the white house to replace the sequester. >> boehner is flat-out wrong. president obama has had a plan all along. it's called a balanced plan to avert the sequester. "meet the press" moderator david gregory confronted boehner with the facts. >> mr. speaker, that's not true. they made it very clear, as the president just did, that he has a plan that he has put forward that involves entitlement cuts, that involves spending cuts, that you have made a choice, as have republicans, to leave tax loopholes in place. and you would rather have those and live with all these -- >> ah, david, that's just nonsense. if he had a plan, why wouldn't senate democrats go ahead and pass it? >> well, boehner tried to push the same lie later in the interview. >> senate democrats have done nothing. it's time for them to vote. >> well, the boehner interview was taped on friday. so he would have known the senate was planning to vote on two different plans. the democratic plan got a majority 51 vote, but not enough

to overcome a republican filibuster. how about those rules, harry? and of course the republican plan failed there is more. speaker boehner was asked about the effect of sequestration on the economy. >> i don't know whether it's going to hurt the economy or not. i don't think anyone quite understands how the sequester is really going to work. >> that is jaw-dropping. in an op-ed of "the wall street journal" on february 20th, not long ago, boehner wrote "a week from now, a dramatic new federal policy is set to go into effect that threatens u.s. national security, thousands of jobs, and more." i mean he wrote that. and then he goes and says, well, i'm really not sure what is going to happen with the economy. which is it? let's turn to congressman bill pascrell of new jersey with us tonight, and also congresswoman rosa delauro and john larson. great to have all of you with us.

rosa, boehner says the republicans don't have a plan, but they obviously did. are they just counting on people not paying attention to this stuff? >> i think they're just in their own universe. you pointed out and it's been pointed out over and over again, the president has laid many plans at their doorstep to see what they might be willing to do. our colleague, congressman chris van hollen introduced a substitute in the house side, and quite frankly that. >> wouldn't even allow it to come up. they really want to go down this road of the sequester. and by the way, if the speaker doesn't know how bad this would be, all he needs to do is listen to ben bernanke about what kind of an effect this would have on economic recovery. all he has to do is listen to the national association of business economists who said sequestration is a bad idea. but i would suggest to him that he talk to one of the 25,000 women who is going to be

unwilling -- unable to be able to get a breast or cervical cancer screening or a family whose child is going to be kicked off of head start, or a woman or infant or a toddler who no longer are going to have access. >> there is no question about it. >> that's right. >> but congressman larson, on one hand, he says he doesn't know what the effect is going to have. on the other hand, he says op said, gosh, we're going to lose a bunch of jobs here. which is it? is he that mixed up, or is he just trying to fool people? >> they never let the truth get in the way of the real story. and that's unfortunate for the speaker and for the country. and what we have here, ed, and you've done a great job on this show of pointing out, we don't have a deficit crisis. we have a health care crisis in this nation that needs to be solved. we don't have a problem -- a sequester problem, we have a jobs problem. we need to put the country back to work. and we've been in congress now, and we haven't met.

they haven't put any plan forward. most importantly that. >> haven't put any plan forward for jobs. that's what the real issue is out there with the american people. the people are tired of this. they're tired of all the games. they're tired of the lying. they're tired of all of this. they want the see results. they want to go back to work. they want us to solve their problems. >> how can one man have so much power and n a representative government? i think this is a bad lesson for america. you got republicans who retain control of the congress, even though it had a 9% approval rating. congressman pascrell, is boehner making a political observation that he can ride this thing out with no personal downside and hope the public gets frustrated with the president? >> well, the speaker likes to embellish the truth. the fact is this. he just said in that same interview you went to a few moments ago that what we should do is be cutting tax, and that

will create those jobs. we went in 2001 and 2003. we had major tax cuts, mostly for those wealthy in our country. and what happened? we were supposed to have a creation of a 1,500,000 jobs. we lost millions and millions of jobs, which led to the great recession of 2007 and 2008. you can't have it both ways. and what we need to be doing is stimulating the economy and not coming to the end product, which they would like us to do and say all you have to do is cut programs and we'll get back to where we belong. talk about phonies. they put up a budget that supposedly is going to make things even, balance the budget in ten years. that budget was 40 years just last year. god knows what the heck cuts they're talking about for us in america. we're talking about the american people now. >> rosa, what is the conclusion here? what options does president obama have other than to go out on the road and ask the american people to put pressure on republicans?

>> well, the fact of the matter is that that is what we need to do, and it has got to be the balanced approach where you have to be looking at what are the revenue source. >> they say no more revenue. >> listen, let's just talk about spending. you want to talk about closing those loopholes for oil and gas or the special interests? that is spending. you want cut spending? it ought to be included in what we view as spending cuts. and we ought to be cutting that, and that would give us additional revenue. >> what if the democrats asked the republicans to identify one loophole. i haven't heard one. >> we can identify them. >> not only can we identify them, chris hollen -- >> the republicans have not identified one loophole that i'm aware of. >> well, listen, it was the speaker who said not that long ago that we could deal with about $800 billion in closing down those loop holes and reforming the tax code and the

special interests. and yet today they are unwilling to put one penny of that $800 billion on the table. >> congressman larson, what about that? >> it's absolutely true. but you have to take a look at this thing. you know, i think that people give the speaker an awful lot of credit that they don't deserve. and that's primarily because he is the leader without followers. and it's made this place dysfunctional. and what we need to do is get back to work, get the country back to work through jobs, and focus on the things that are important to the american people. >> what are the options of the president, though, john? what can he do other than ask -- >> i think rosa is right. you have to take this out to the public and continue to get on the stump, because it's the people that are going to make a difference. they're the ones that are going to emphasize the change that are needed. the hurt hasn't been felt dramatically, but it will be. >> yeah. >> the unfortunate thing is it

shouldn't be felt at all. we should be focusing on putting the country back to work. that's what is the most disturbing thing. >> bill, your thoughts? >> i think that we have them where we want them. but the american people are at the right spot right now because they're trying to figure this out. look, there is some drama on both sides. we got to get to the truth and not embellish the facts. they've done a great job embellishing. what we need is to come back to reality. this is not reality tv, ed. >> it is not. bill pascrell, rosa delauro and john larson. greet have you with us tonight. coming up, good news for batman and bad news for sarah palin. i'll bring you the details next.

and of course we love hearing from our fans on facebook and on twitter. many of you are responding to news on our blog that over 50,000 teachers are in danger of losing their jobs because of sequester. on facebook, deb says republicans want to keep us stupid and poor. oh, yes.

johnny brown writes republicans won't be satisfied until they have privatized every job connected to a union. and margaret stringer writes, behold usa, the richest third world country on the planet. you can go to our facebook page right now and get in on the conversation. don't forget to like "the ed show" while you're there. i appreciate that so much, i do. and still to come, this viral video could be bad news for some miners down under. that's next.

and we are back with the good and the bad. tonight there is good news and bad news. first, the good news from england, where a fat guy in pajamas is fighting crime and bagging crook. this is police footage from a station house in bradford, england. batman vanished after turning in the alleged thief on the right. the identity of the caped crusader is still a mystery. so there is a chance it was actually adam west? that really happened, folks. more bad news regarding those harlem shake videos. this one is from way down under

in australia, where 15 gold miners got funky below the earth's surface, except when the video was made public, the men were fired for violating safety standards? good video, bad news. great news out of new york -- depending on which basketball team were you rooting for on sunday. >> edney, tosses it. it's knocked around, and mt. vernon is going to hold on and win. hold on, oh, goodness! are they going to count that? >> did it count? yes, it did. take a look at it again. new rochelle was down by two points when their inbounds pass was picked up. mt. vernon tried to throw the ball into the air to kill the clock. but new rochelle stole it and hit a bomb for the game-winner. and actually, the officials reversed the call. best ending to a basketball game since hoosiers, don't you think?

finally, more bad news for cpac and sarah palin. they were both destroyed this weekend by former bush aide matthew dowd. >> cpac to me totally diminishes their credibility as an organization. and they invite sarah palin who wasn't competent enough to keep a fox news contract? but she is invited to a cpac meeting? >> i just want to be fair to sarah palin. she may be a little rough around the edges, the idea there is actually a competency requirement at fox news is flat-out ridiculous. >> do you believe that ohio has been settled? >>, no i don't. >> so you're not saying that obama isn't going to win. >> no. i think this is premature. >> we have breaking news here on the fox news channel. the individual mandate has been ruled unconstitutional. >> i'm surprised. because -- in that case -- so through the use of the commerce clause, we can now mandate that people buy things? >> no.

he didn't say you could use the commerce clause. he said you could not use the commerce clause. >> right. >> tonight in our survey, i asked you will this country ever elect another bush? 8% of you say yes. 92% of you say no. coming up, dennis rodman shares drinks is one of the world's most dangerous leaders and brings home a message for president obama. eugene robinson will weigh in on rodman's north korean visit, next. [ female announcer ] going to sleep may be easy, but when you wake up in the middle of the night it can be frustrating. it's hard to turn off and go back to sleep. intermezzo is the first and only prescription sleep aid approved for use as needed in the middle of the night

when you can't get back to sleep. it's an effective sleep medicine you don't take before bedtime. take it in bed only when you need it and have at least four hours left for sleep. do not take intermezzo if you have had an allergic reaction to drugs containing zolpidem, such as ambien. allergic reactions such as shortness of breath or swelling of your tongue or throat may occur and may be fatal. intermezzo should not be taken if you have taken another sleep medicine at bedtime or in the middle of the night or drank alcohol that day. do not drive or operate machinery until at least 4 hours after taking intermezzo and you're fully awake. driving, eating, or engaging in other activities while not fully awake without remembering the event the next day have been reported. abnormal behaviors may include aggressiveness, agitation, hallucinations, or confusion. alcohol or taking other medicines that make you sleepy may increase these risks. in depressed patients, worsening of depression, including risk of suicide, may occur. intermezzo, like most sleep medicines,

has some risk of dependency. common side effects are headache, nausea, and fatigue. so if you suffer from middle-of-the-night insomnia, ask your doctor about intermezzo and return to sleep again. ♪

he loves basketball. and i say the same thing i said.

obama loves basketball. let's start there. >> tonight's big finish, one of the most controversial sports stars has befriended one of the world's most controversial dictators, north korea's kim jong un. really likes basketball. so he allowed dennis rodman to visit the capital city with a film crew. rodman brought back this message for president obama. >> he want obama to do one thing, call him. >> he wants a call from president obama? >> that's right. he told me that. he said if you can, dennis, i don't want do war. i don't want do war. >> okay. i'm not sure we should take dennis's word for it, though. peace-loving north korea conducted its third nuclear test right before dennis rodman's visit, and now is working on a long-range missile. but let's forget about peace and talk about love. here is dennis rodman again. >> his country like him, not like him, love him. love him. >> rodman and some harlem

globetrotters got special tours of north korea's best sites. they did not see this north korea, where sic million people need food aid. 19% of the babies are malnourished, and most people make four bucks a day. those statistics explain why the state department was not thrilled about watching kim jong un roll out the red carpet for rodman. >> clearly you've got the regime spending money to wine and dine foreign visitors when they should be feeding their own people. >> so let's get this straight. the united states has not held formal talks with north korea since 2005, but this guy gets a seat at the table? dennis rodman, the player who head butted a ref and was once called the worm? the man who has always attracted attention for keeping strange company might have finally outdone himself. let's turn to eugene robinson, msnbc political analyst and associate editor pulitzer prize winning columnist for "the washington post." okay. how bizarre is this? >> well, it's hard to get

weirder than this, ed. i mean, dennis rodman has i think five nba championships. he has been defensive player of the year. he is in the hall of fame. he is not going to be adding a nobel peace prize to his list of honors. it's not going to happen. this was really bizarre. >> does this make north korea look approachable to the rest of the world? is this good press for north korea? >> well, if you're 6'9" alien who used to play basketball, yes, you can approach north korea. no, it doesn't. this is completely divorced from reality and the fact that kim jong un is conforming to the stereotype of him, which is of some sort of like spoiled brat who likes basketball and runs the most totalitarian country on earth and is threatening to launch nuclear weapons. if that's approachable, i don't know what unapproachable. >> well, rodman says he loves him. of course, there has been strange conn